-
Website
http://thedistrictweekly.com/ -
Original page
http://thedistrictweekly.com/2009/daily/writing-shotgun/city-hitchcock-is-off-the-hook-for-wetlands-area-desecration/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
Hitchcock don’t need no permits!
“No restoration of land!”
Says Burnham, Dean’s fan.
It’s time for an appeal and a writ.
Absolutely corrupt. Positively shameful. What a sham. We deserve better than this.
John Fentis a former prosecutor for the City of Long Beach posted the following in LBPost, commenting on Mr.ZumMallen's article on the zoning hearing decision:
"No Action Taken In Ruling Of Wetlands-Area Destruction
by Ryan ZumMallen 10/12/09
John Fentis a former prosecutor for the City of Long Beach posted the following in LBPost, commenting on Mr.ZumMallen's article on the zoning hearing decision:
"No Action Taken In Ruling Of Wetlands-Area Destruction
by Ryan ZumMallen 10/12/09
Example: "The Green Dream Team Org"--put 10 people on as appealents--and they would only pay $5.00 per person. Checked with city....
Correction: Subarea 23 was bulldozed on March 19 and 20
This is tentative and I am attempting to get precise info to post later.
Following the March 20 and 21 bulldozing of the wetlands, Sean Hitchcock met with SELECT city officials most of the day PRIOR to the March 24, 2009 city council meeting. Immediately following the meeting, I was told by a person who had attended this city meeting with Hitchcock, that Hitchcock had been informed by city officials, including the City Attorney, there would NOT be penalties forthcoming from the city. Mr. Burnham was in attendance at that meeting.
This decision happened 7-months ago and three days after the bulldozing. The city's strategy was to let the issue simmer down so they could bulldoze it under the rug. Since that failed, they just bulldozed it anyways.
There is email evidence which might raise this implication, maybe you have more. If you can raise an inference, please do.
We missed you and Sopo, Kowal, and Jensen at the Hearings. Please Appeal to Planning with us ? It would be helpful to get on the official record here and preserve your right to be heard on this matter.
It costs 50$, and we have 10 days ending the 23rd, at 430PM.
This ruling was just step one in a long process. Get involved please. It all matters.
The Appeal Form is online, check the zoning administrator box, the Application number is No. 0904-15, 6400 Loynes Drive.
Every advocate's voice matters, as does their investment of time, research and perspective.
Help us sign up some Appellants as well if you feel so inclined.
Appellants get a chunk of time, not a mere 3 minutes. Non Appellants testify under the standard 3 minute limit.
Thanks to those who appeared Joan Hawley McGrath,Biologist Brenda McMillan, Sandie Van Horn, Mary Parsell, Ann Denison, Ann Cantrell, Pat Bliss, G.Kajer,Mel Nutter, Thomas Marchese, Pat Towner,Mary Suttie,Elizabeth Lambe,Kerry Allie, Gabriella Weeks and Koby , Dave Wielenga,Jan Dahl, Dave Robertson,Cindy Crawford,Larry Goodhue,Eric Zahn, and 3 assistants from Tidal Influence,,Heather Altman,2 University Park Estates Homeowners,and about a dozen other concerned individuals or experts.
There were over 30 solid advocates, activists, or experts there for the Coastline. Thanks.
Let's bomb them with Appeals !!
Thanks to Rae Gabelich for sending Staff to iisten as well.
http://www.lbds.info/civica/filebank/blobdload....
Derek Burnham
Current Planning Officer
Building A Better Long Beach
LONG BEACH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
333 West Ocean Blvd.
Long Beach, CA 90802
T: 562.570.6261
F: 562.570.6068
http://lbds.longbeach.gov/
Send a check and the completed form by mail, or the form by email and the check to City of Long Beach, Mail to Derek Burnham-5th Floor, 333 w. Ocean Blvd, LB,CA, 90802
So rumors (well sourced) have it that they want to lay down a membrane then cover this Wetlands with a whole bunch of plastic astro turf, and then place a small environmental set aside area somewhere on the property.
Only in Long Beach under DeLong !!
Plastic Wetlands !! Unbelievable !!
Just after the vote, Mr Greet, of his own volition, drafted a very persuasive, and well worded appeal, directly to the Mayor,to please use his Veto power to rescind the deal in the public interest.
It takes the courage of your convictions to write the Mayor as a sworn Officer.
This was a very thoughtful effort which actually places the issue in the record by putting the question on the Mayor's desk. Nobody else thought to do this. Smart move. Now the failure to act is in the public domain.
Also, after the Wetlands Grading disaster, Mr Greet drafted a well worded complaint to the Contractors License Board, requesting that penalties and sanctions be applied to the 2H firm for ignoring a range of laws. Others did this too, but non of them were an active Police Sarge. So in fairness,the readers should bear in mind that Mr Greet does many good things beyond serve and protect.
If a sworn Officer can advocate for the fair application of the rule of law, fiscal accountability, coastal conservation, and fair respect for residents rights, as a regular employee, nobody else has an excuse not to make some effort towards resolving a wide range of concerns.
When questioned as to why he did not reveal these good works, he stated, ''I have never been one to toot my own horn.'' Seems fair to put this on the record.
It also seems fair to review the entire record and observe who actually filed nothing, or failed to get involved, or testify, or help.
But without question, the driving force in Coastal Preservation, and fairness, and accountability, and transparency, over the last 2 or more years, has been David Wielenga, Theo Douglas, and the District Weekly.
David, you are a Coastal Preservation Hero.
Now join the Appellants !!
When I appealed to our Mayor concerning the land swap and complained to the CSLB concerning Hitchcock and 2H; whenever I comment here or write my columns for LBP or send letters to the editor of the PT, I do so as a private citizen, a voter and a resident of the 3rd Council District, not as a cop.
It's admittedly a difficult balance to strike sometimes; but I do my best to remain the dispassionate and unopinionated law enforcement professional our community expects and deserves when I am on duty and reserve expressing my various opinions and acting upon my various advocacies for those times when I am off duty.
There are, indeed, *many* driving forces for constructive change in our city and I fully agree that TDW, Dave and Theo are among them and so also, good sir, are you!
And each and every one of you can write a simple concern letter, or complaint to Andrew Willis, c/o, California Coastal Commission, Long Beach Office.
To assist those along the way, we will try to post our concerns here, to help any and all draft their complaints.
We had well over a 100 appellants to Home Depot, roughly.
Also, please, engage Council here. They can go a long way towards pleading a case to Planning before the hearing.
We need to review and challenge every line of the Staff reports, and in this case, the flawed findings are key to winning.
Often at Coastal, the inadequacy of the findings is a big deal.
On home depot, they should have had 10 pages, with support. They had a paragraph barely adequate to justify building a dock !!
The present findings, that the 2H biology report was accurate, are fatally flawed. Also, the finding of no wetlands vegetation, or ponds, will not withstand the evidence, many believe.
More soon.
As a team, we can do great things. And the wildlife and wetlands around here need every friend that they can find, especially under a Wetlands Developing one term Council fellow !!
This entire deal is purely Political . Colonna, Drummond, Hall and others would never tolerate this devastation for a minute, nor will deRong's predecessor.
9 days and counting
Anyone should be able to speak to the appeal (subject to time limits which can be "shrunk" to one minute) or you may submit written arguements to the appeal (should be in the hands of the hearing body 8 days [minimum] in advance of the hearing).
Yes, theoretically, a non-appellant should be allowed to speak for 3 minutes. However, it is not at all unusual for the official conducting the appeal hearing (planning commission chair, mayor or mayor pro-tem) to cut that time to 1 minute if there are numerous speakers wishing to be heard. This was frequently the case during Queen Bev's tenure. There were also occasions when she would only allow 10 speakers from each side to be heard (probably a gross violation of CEQA law, but she always got away with it).
Derek takes orders and probably didn't like them any more than the 100 or so people at the meeting. The real culprit is always the same. Nothing at this level goes on in the 3rd District without the explicit or implicit approval of Gary DeLong.
Your job should be to not only appeal this ruling, but to get to work on figuring out how to make 100% sure that this guy is not in charge for the next 4 years. Or...this just may be the beginning.
Rarely am I shocked when the City does not listen to their citizens. Today, I was. many in the audience were eye witnesses
to what happened on subarea 23 last March.
Despite overwelming evidence that subarea 23 has been slated for conservation for the past 25 years--the Planning officers did not hear. Despite evidence that Ty Garrison, biologist for SWCA did not do his homework and was totally ignorant on the history of SEADIP--that didn't seem to matter.
Despite mathematical evidence that 2H did not comply with the California Coastal Commission's Emergency Permit when capping the methane,they choose to ignore the facts.
Despite the fact that subarea 23 is shown on Coastal Conservency maps.Coastal maps and even LCWA maps as wetlands-they closed their ears.
Despite the fact, that two noted biologists took issue with both the SWCA's report as well as the city's peer review--their minds were made up!
The zonning planners had asked for evidence of how subarea 23 looked before the devastation--they received it in numerous pictures taken from the neighbors-where is it now? In the round file?
Even though Delong's office, as well as Craig Beck assured constituents that any fire permit(weed abatement) would be handeled carefully with conditions including pulling by hand
and a biologist on site--they could care less, and turned that down.
Planners,Derek Burnham and Jeff Winklepleck--hang your heads.
http://longbeachwetlands.shutterfly.com/linksan...
This matter is a long way from over.
It was clear that deLong and friends had pulled the strings from upstairs, and that the Staff was along for the ride.
That's expectable, as will be our Legal posture going forward.
One in the audience heard Hitchcocks ttorney say 'bring it on'', nice dose of gasoline on the fire pal, we will. Hope Hitchcock is smart enough to know that Attorneys love to stir up a fight, and bill for it.
On to round 2, and beyond.
It was nice to see Mr Wielenga at the hearing, fine man.
There was enough evidence to win 10 times over, and we will save it for where it counts.
At times like this many who want to believe that justice is still somewhere in City Hall, simply hang our head in shame.
Running a Kangaroo Court is an embarrassment to the average Law abiding citizen.
The Coastal Preservation advocates deserved better, and would be wise to help elect some better representatives.
And again, the Mayor never even lifted a finger? We saw not one staff member from the Mayor, or DeLongs Office??
Wrong Beach deserves better.
They actually found that no habitat existed ?? Right, you bulldozed it all.
And they found 'No Wetlands' despite zoning it as such themselves?
See you in Court
Not much stopping T. Dean from unleashing the bulldozers on his wetland holdings now.
We can't wait to send hit pieces during the elction cycle with the bulldozers ruining the Wetlands !! LOL
Guess we'll end up at a full blown Coastal Hearing, then Civil Court we hear.
Good. If you want more of this type of eco destruction, vote for DeRong next April, better yet, please don't !!
One of the Staff looked like the character 'Brain damage'', the other like ' Pinto'. To be fair, their hands were tied by Bulldozer DeLong.
The only 'Green' in this Supposedly Green City is the Long Green used to buy outcomes, favors, and perks.
This land has been severely restricted for decades, and the deed proves that. You have to be pretty ignorant of the law to envision this land as unencumbered, development wise.
To change the Land Use is a big deal that can take years of pitch battle.
Thankfully this land is on the ocean, and in the original permit jurisdiction of the Coastal Commission. Before Coastal, you can spend years merely trying to modify an existing boat dock.
A soccer field is neither a Coastal Dependent, nor Coastal Related Use, so area precedent will be key. Go find a waterfront soccer field for an example of a permissable use? What nexus does an ordinary use, like a sports field, which can be located away from the ocean, have with the ocean? None.
The power plant is a coastal dependent use because such permits must be close to the ocean to take and discharge cooling water.
A coastal related use might be a boat mooring, or a fishery. The problem on this lot is that LA Councty owns the ocen frontage along their easement to maintain the channel, so many uses are land locked on the ocean access side.
So as we contemplate uses, try to amend the Local Coastal Program.
Yesterday's ruling, was a gross miscarriage of justice, but predictable given the present political reality in District 3. We have a Councilfellow who apparently see's no problem with Wetlands Development, and many will never forget this.
Politically, some calculus appears to be in play where Mr DeLong feels powerful enough, or popular enough, to stab the Police Department in the back during the Council Budget hearings, and stand aside as Fire Stations nearly got closed, and now he apparently has no problem walking away from the Coastal Preservation community ? Wonderful. Your opponents are proud to continue to be friends with these entities Mr Delong.
There are people targeting raisng at least 150,000 to give the residents a nice alternative to your problematic, detached, friends first style of governance. And the race is just about on.
The 2H Biologist did say one relevant thing, '' Introducing irrigation on top of a landfill is forbidden, and extremely dangerous when done next to the ocean.'' This is exactly why our Engineering Staff prohibited such use through the original zoning designation. The potential liability is huge.
Let's see how they establish grass for a soccer field without water ??
Many will ask that any concerned party write a simple email to the Planning Commission on the Appeal Form. We hope to have more Appellants than we had before the Zoning Bizz 'czar' yesterday.
Long Beach, the Wetlands Developing 'Green City''. Where outcomes are for sale to the highest bidder?? If not, what expalins this ?
A hired biologist, opposed by two eminent biologists, and a file of evidence, and a full record of preservation data, and Staff rules.."No species, no habitat, no obligate plants, no wetlands?''.
We will present the evidence again, where the fact finders are not deaf.
And here is some news, when we brought this matter to Coastal, the 2H gang, and the City failed to appear. And the Commissioners heard just a little of the evidence, and were extremely concerned.
Oh joy.
Not one resident spoke on behalf of hitchcock, or his idea to put plastic turf over wetlands
http://www.greaterlongbeachsoccerclub.com/page/...
Due to his relationship with Sean Hitchcock, it is obvious Mr. Pilster has a bias. However, what is interesting is his choosing to remain anonymous when commenting in apparent support of his buddy.
So soccer fan, are you trying to help teach our children that killing animals, and smashing burrowing mammals, and destroying habitat for endangered species is acceptable?
That destroying species is a fair trade off for a ball game?
Any kid who choses to play there choses to play on graves.....to play on decompsing dens, with pups, and the death zone for thousands of living things? What about the largely devastated range of animals?
Any parent who condones this in essence sponsors Wetlands development too. Is that what we want our kids to learn??.
Our kids would run from such infamy. From such senseless, selfish destruction.
And also, there will be big news, supporting the preservation claims, soon.
Dave got a call, as did the Attorney teams
http://twitter.com/mpilster
http://www.presstelegram.com/portlet/article/ht...
The issue is, 8 days to Appeal, and evidence.
Please make sure that you cite the 2 Biologist Reports which prove that this area is an ESHA, and Wetlands.
A link to one report is on the Wetlands Land Trust Website, click the link.
Objectively, this is just one more dispute that would have never errupted if we had a real Councilperson.
This District has to send this dirty dealer home !! These disputes are wholly political, you know, keeping the friends happy and upsetting the majority. Raping nature again.
He is going to have a well funded, well laid out race on his hands ! And he is going to face a thorough cross examination in front of thousands of citizens, from day one.
Prepare to sweat, country club boy.
1. Person A may know Person B
2. Mike Ruehle does not agree with person B
3. Therefore Person A is biased.
Absolutely brilliant.
1. Mike Pilster's daughter plays soccer with wetlands destroyer Sean Hitchcock's daughter.
2. Mike Pilster's daughter is coached by Sean Hitchcock.
3. Mike Pilster refers to Sean Hitchcock as coach Hitchcock in numerous postings on the soccer team website.
4. Mike Pilster's profile was created when he began posting comments in defense of his buddy Sean Hitchcock and not before.
5. Mike Pilster (Soccer Fan) uses an anonymous name when posting comments in support of his buddy Sean Hitchcock.
6. Mike Pilster is biased.
This has nothing to do with wether or not I agree with Sean Hitchcock. It's about him or anyone knowingly doing something against the law with the assistance of crooked Councilman DeLong and not being forced to pay for their misdeeds.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Regulations/Title27/ch3...
This should start another interesting debate.
How will uber conservative Derong view this? He may have another nice issue to duck, ignore, parse, obfuscate, etc.
But if you think about it, he must have signed on since he and dean are close buddies.
The neighbors ought to love this debate.
Stay tuned
''The DeLong Bong''.
Guess it would have to be Gold plated, and very exclusive. You might have to be part of a special click to get one. But it could be purchased for a high price.
It probably should has a set of earplugs attached, to tune everybody else out.
Oh yes, and a logo with a Bulldozer smashing the nests of endangered species.
We might also market soccer balls for the wetlands soccer field that he is helping come about. We can put logo's on the soccer balls, of egrets, and herons,and racoons, and brown burrowing owls, and squirrels. Then the kids can kick and kick those balls, and think of Hitchcock and DeLong ??
Purportedly, Mr. Dean verbally relayed the order to clear brush as needed at the property line of the Mobile home park.... There was no written order handed over.
Sean Hitchcock, a very successful contractor/developer, performing HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS work for the city of Long Beach and others boasts this on his website:
"2H management's "hands on" approach and proactive involvement with all aspects of the project lifecycle is another important factor to the accomplishments of the company.”
Source: 2H web page: http://www.2hconstruction.com/company.asp
Let me try to understand this...
Mr. Dean, a very intelligent developer/negotiator/trader did not discuss the status of the land use, with regard to future development of the property with Mr. Hitchcock, a very intelligent/successful, contractor/developer?
This transaction is described by the offending parties as casual as buying a burger at the drive through across the wetland. No discussion, nothing. By two big time Long Beach players… Right.
Time and time again, all around the United States, this very thing is done, the owner claiming she didn’t know the rules, or did in fact, know, but proceeded anyway. They know that the fines or repercussions will be acceptable losses, compared to what end results are desired.
These methods are commonly used at large multinational corporations, such as: “How many wrongful death lawsuits can we pay for, and still be ahead, without having to recall our product, because a total recall would be a huge loss”. This is just good business. Any method necessary for a profit.
And in this case, profit is especially easy with the blessing of the City.
Mr. Hitchcock relayed to me: " The property is NOT a part of the wetlands (check the wetlands map). This property is a landfill over an old city dump (same property as the mobile home park next door).
We were merely clearing the overgrown weeds in order to replace with grass to make the area nicer for the community. It takes large equipment to effectively clear weeding over such a large area.
".
There was no mention of an "order to weed". He claims here that he knows the history of the property, and that there is a dump on the site.
Thanks City of Long Beach. I do love living here, but am becoming increasingly embarrassed by city management. It's not about doing the right thing by the residents that have elected them (I'm talking about the public that actually cast their votes, not the dollars thrown at them by their other "constituents").
FYI: Here is a link to Google Satellite imagery of what this parcel looked like before the “weed pulling” began:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=33.767179%2C...
We started getting calls as soon as esteemed jurist John Fentiss opined on the LB Post. That was huge. What a resume he has for protecting the environment and doing good work. Let's hope that he files an Appeal, as a citizen, about the flawed zoning ruling which erroneously seekes to ratify this wanton destruction of a well known, zoned, designated ESHA ( Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area)
Men like him, and Jim McCabe, are awesome. They are from the system, and know the system, and they are intellectually honest enough to advocate for fairness, equity, common people, the coastline, and the rule of law, despite the system. This takes courage.
Bless them both, continuously. These two men can, and will, make a meaningful difference.
They are not malcontents, nor turncoats. Yes, some will try to call them harsh names, impotently. The truth is, they are a symptoms of a system in need of reform. The are part of the cure, not part of the pathogens.
Gentleman, pick up this file, and help us plead the people's brief.
Thanks John, and Jim. You matter.